Pine,
A proper response would take the Wikimedia Foundation some time to prepare. As Anna has
tried to indicate, and as evidenced by a number of things, there are indeed a number of
financial oversights.
Regarding costs, as has been previously stated by the Foundation and Board, the Board
approved a spending resolution last year for expenses related to the movement strategy of
up to $2.5 million over Fiscal Year 2016-17 (July 2016 - June 2017) and Fiscal Year
2017-18 (July 2017 - June 2018).
On the topic of how resources are spent, I would like to share more on the cost of your
request. Because you escalated in your language (e.g., calling our financial practices lax
and asking to speak to a member of the Board), three senior leaders and two Board members
have now spent time on this. I imagine that your concern is genuine, but the speed with
which you went from asking for financial details when we have ample financial oversight,
to hinting at fiscal malfeasance was a bit quick.
You may not know this, but these kinds of requests are costly, particularly when it
escalates with a strongly negative comment and a demand to speak to a Board member. I
share these figures on the cost of this request thus far in the service of transparency.
• 6: Number of staff involved in responding, including 3 senior leaders
• 2: Number of Board members now involved
• 1.5 hours: Estimated amount of Board time spent thus far
• 10 hours: Estimated amount of staff time spent thus far
• $1,500: Estimated cost of staff time (considering expenses beyond just salary)
Providing the detailed answer you have requested would require considerably more time and
increase the cost more. We have decided not to provide that response because we have ample
financial oversight and we would like not to set a precedent of spending resources
discussing this level of detail on financial matters. You are a valued member of this
community, and this is not the best way for us to work together. That is why we have
established processes.
We appreciate your passion and dedication to the vision and our communities and hope you
will read this response in the good faith that it was written.
Greg and Anna (2 of the 6 staff involved)
On Jun 27, 2017, at 3:38 PM, Pine W
<wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Anna,
* How
much is this timeline extension projected to cost, and from what
source are the funds being drawn? (Note that this doesn't assume that the
decision was a bad one, but I very much want to know the source of the
funds and how much is likely to be drawn from it.)
We've got this covered, Pine. We are fiscally managing this process and all
of our contracts well. Thank you for your concern.
Please answer my question: how much is this timeline extension projected to
cost,
and from what source are the funds being drawn?
> * Could you elaborate on the benefits of this
timetable change for people
> who are not involved with affiliates? We've seen some responses from
> Strainu and Yaroslov (thank you both!) and I would like to hear WMF's
> perspective.
>
The benefits of the change in the timetable are
that 4/4 stakeholder
groups
told us that this was a meaningful exercise, that
they are earnestly
engaged in thinking about the future, and that they need more time for
translation and conversation on this important subject. 3/4 tracks are non
affiliates (on-wiki, new voices, experts).
We agreed with them. These are meaningful
conversations. We are learning a
lot and we need to hear what people have to say and they need more time to
say it.
OK, that makes sense.
* Could you also discuss what measures are being taken to control costs in
the strategy process?
We have plenty of measures in place to monitor
costs (e.g., we don't need
to control them because they are not out of control, we are within our
budget). Also, describing financial metrics at any lower level of detail
would be a waste of the strategy budget since we are within it.
I disagree with that assessment. Simply because expenses are within
budget don't mean that all expenses which were charged to the budget
are reasonable and accurate, and I am disappointed to hear that WMF's
standards for its finances are so lax. This convinces me all the more
that my original request is important for WMF to answer: please discuss
what measures are being taken to control costs in the strategy process.
The level of detail that I now think WMF should provide is much higher
than the level of detail with which I previously would have been satisfied.
My level of concern here is high enough that I am asking the WMF
Audit Committee chair, Kelly, to comment on this situation. Something seems
very wrong here, and I am concerned about WMF's financial integrity.
Pine
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 8:33 PM, Anna Stillwell <astillwell(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> Hello Pine,
>
> Good evening. In line.
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This thread is going in many directions, and I'm enjoying reading the
>> conversation.
>>
>> If I may go back to some questions that I asked in my earlier post, I
> would
>> like to hear from Katherine (or someone else at WMF, perhaps Anna):
>>
>
> First, some context... a good deal of this has been iterative by design. We
> had an overarching idea of where we were headed (e.g. a shared direction
> first, roles and responsibilities second), but then we knew we would learn
> to refine or course correct based on what we hear.
>
> We've been hearing to extend the timeline on all fronts--organized groups
> and affiliates (e.g., time for conversation), on wiki (e.g., time for
> translation and conversation) and new voices and experts (e.g., "we've seen
> all of the data but our communities have yet to see and reflect upon
> it")... so that is the background reasoning.
>
>
>> * How much is this timeline extension projected to cost, and from what
>> source are the funds being drawn? (Note that this doesn't assume that the
>> decision was a bad one, but I very much want to know the source of the
>> funds and how much is likely to be drawn from it.)
>>
>
> We've got this covered, Pine. We are fiscally managing this process and all
> of our contracts well. Thank you for your concern.
>
>
> * Could you elaborate on the benefits of this
timetable change for people
> who are not involved with affiliates? We've seen some responses from
> Strainu and Yaroslov (thank you both!) and I would like to hear WMF's
> perspective.
>
>
> The benefits of the change in the timetable are that 4/4 stakeholder groups
told us that this was a meaningful exercise, that
they are earnestly
engaged in thinking about the future, and that they need more time for
translation and conversation on this important subject. 3/4 tracks are non
affiliates (on-wiki, new voices, experts).
>
We agreed with them. These are meaningful
conversations. We are learning a
lot and we need to hear what people have to say and they need more time to
say it.
>
>>
>> * Could you also discuss what measures are being taken to control costs
> in
>> the strategy process?
>>
>
We have plenty of measures in place to monitor
costs (e.g., we don't need
to control them because they are not out of control, we are within our
budget). Also, describing financial metrics at any lower level of detail
would be a waste of the strategy budget since we are within it.
>
> Always good to hear from you,
> /a
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Pine
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>